By - camred85
This is the horrifying result of a cult that is meddlesome and dogmatic.
I can’t imagine the pain the couple and their loved ones are experiencing right now. It’s insane. Fuck this fucking cult. And I hope those directly affected by this wake up and realize that if Jehovah exists, He doesn’t have **anything** to do with Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Apparently his first wife is connected somehow. Because a private confession between spouses is definitely accepted.
True, but if the ex-spouse wants to cause issues, they can just say they never admitted anything and it’s their word against their spouses. This happened in my uncles case and he and his (new) wife were both disfellowshiped after getting married. They were in their 70s too and both had been single for years, lol. So ridiculous.
Just another way the borg strains out the knat and swallows the camel. Its ridiculous!
No kidding. Here’s a watchtower telling you to get a mature sister to help you purchase appropriate slacks, but don’t mind these CSA cases. They are the modern day Pharisees.
Well, they have to counsel young women about what they wear! They blame victims all the time! SMH.
I know of a case where a wife confessed to her husband during an argument but later denied what she had said. To him and to elders. It took a few years for him to finally get proof and he had to stick with her and not have sex with her that whole time.
I remember a simular situation. A friend of the family wanted to get married but their ex insisted she hadnt committed Adultery. There were stake outs of her house.
My ex tried to day I committed Adultery.... with my family member. Yeah that was a bit much. The worst part was he brought it up in court. When I explained the familial relationship the judge just looked at him and said no.
Although disfellowshipping as practiced by JWs is not scriptural, of every “sin” that JWs consider a judicial matter, this one is clearly laid out in the Bible by Jesus himself. The Bible explicitly records Jesus as saying anyone who gets divorced and marries someone else is an adulterer - unless the reason for the divorce was adultery (Matt 19:9). Most Christian religions ignore Jesus because his teaching here is absurd, unrealistic, and burdensome. Unfortunately, JWs don’t ignore Jesus in this instance.
Yeah, but OP says he thought he was free for remarriage. So it would seem there’s a discrepancy somewhere.
Here’s how i interpret this situation based on the facts presented in the original post. OP said:
> His ex is claiming thier weren’t two witnesses
This statement, combined with the fact the man supposedly thought he was “free” indicates the he likely divorced his wife because he *suspected* she had committed adultery. However, his ex did not confess to the elders and there weren’t two witnesses to her alleged adultery (otherwise he would have been “free”).
Absent more detail, I really don’t know why this guy would have thought he was free, but based on Jesus words and borg rules, he was not.
Having been in this situation myself, and having several friends go through this scenario too, the elders always made it abundantly clear
they are NOT “free” to remarry according to JW rules. In this case, It would seem the elders didnt make it clear or the man just decided he wanted to get on with his life and marry someone else and so, to deflect criticism from judgmental JWs who can’t mind their own business, told people he thought he was free.
I know two other couples who did this exact thing - they knew they would get disfellowshipped but they (initially) pretended to their friends/family that they didn’t. Clearly I don’t know the specifics of what actually happened in this situation, but I would bet something similar is happening here.
Ultimately, I think we can all agree that it’s all bull shit and people should be allowed to divorce someone for whatever reason they want and marry someone else and not have the cult dictate the “fallout” of their personal decisions.
I don't believe Jesus explicitly said you need two witnesses to the alleged adultery or that you need to get permission from elders before remarrying if you believe you're free.
The elders didn't need to get involved here if he believed he was free. That was between him and Jehovah.
Evidently you didn’t read my comment. I started out by saying
> Although disfellowshiping as practiced by JWs is not scriptural
However, i disagree with some of your assumptions about what jesus taught (allegedly - I don’t believe the historical jesus said about 80% of the things attributed to him).
In context at a Matthew 19, jesus was criticizing the Jewish practice where husbands could divorce their wives for pretty much any reason they wanted. So, if two witnesses or a confession were not involved, all a husband would have to do is accuse his wife of adultery and then divorce her. This goes against the entire premise of jesus’ teaching here. Two witnesses or a confession would have been required. Jesus believed in the mosaic law and this would have been required in the scenario he mentioned to establish adultery actually occurred. Additionally, if jesus wanted to teach that a husband could divorce his wife if he *suspected* she committed adultery, he would have said so. But he didn’t. Jesus, as described in the Bible, was a firm believer in the two witness rule and alluded to it several times. And while “elders” as they exist in the cult today clearly were not involved, it was common for older men of the synagogue to resolve disputes of this nature, so the concept is there.
Again - I’m an atheist - i think it’s all bull shit. I think that the historical jesus was a bigoted, immoral, and delusional person. I’m just explaining my view as to what the biblical version of jesus likely believed. It certainly was not something that jesus believed a husband could resolve between “him and Jehovah”
Agreed on the fictional character being bull shit.
>Two witnesses or a confession would have been required.
My point is just that this is not stated in Matthew 19.
The two witness rule as applied by JWs is just as unscriptural as disfellowshipping. Jesus did mention it when taking about a problem with a brother in Matt 18:15-16, but they was not referring to a family issue.
I could have missed it, but I don't see anywhere in the bible where domestic issues such as marital infidelity specifically are applied the two witness rule. It seems to me that the two witness rule was intended for ordinary public disputes between two people and other things, especially of a sexual nature, are excepted. See the direction on when a woman is raped in the field vs the city. No two witnesses required in the field (Deut 22).
If you can get 3 Elders to agree, you can be DF\`d for anything...ANYTHING!
That\`s what happens when you allow Janitors to Police you. Be happy they\`re not allowed to be Brain Surgeons after work.🥴
Agree 100%! I had a 40-yr-old coworker who was grooming 21-yr-old sheltered me. Two elders came to my apt and I told them about this man. They set a meeting at the hall for the next day with three elders. I mentioned it to my co-worker and he INSISTED on being there. No matter what I said, he was determined to go.
I finally thought, "I'll just have the elders tell him he can't be there since I can't convince him." They couldn't make him leave either, so without any meeting whatsoever, they phoned me later and told me that they had decided to DF me.
My co-worker showed up the next day with a moving truck and took me away. He was an abusive child rapist with 15 identities. Seven years passed before I was able to get away from him. My family never spoke to or helped me during that whole time.
When I was first divorced, but not "scripturally free", I knew my ex was seeing someone but wouldn't admit to it. An elder from another KH that I was friends with told me that what I could do was wait a little while and then tell the elders that I knew in my heart that I was free whether my ex would admit or not and I would take it with with Jehovah. He's the only person I've ever heard that from though. My guess is it varies from congregation to congregation.
Send the couple this article: https://wol.jw.borg/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1977729?q=denies+adultery&p=par
It is a loophole in the freedom to remarry policy. No two witnesses required. It worked for my dad getting remarried and the elders were pissed but had no choice but to accept it.
(Remove b from borg in jw.borg link)
It’s nothing but a legalistic cult. Recently I heard of a very similar case like this one. The result is same: df.
These people are the Pharisees that Jesus warned about. They care more about their rules and doctrines than the love of humans or the preciousness of life. They aren’t Christians they just use the book as a guise to appeal to religious people. As far as I can recall, they place more importance on the rigidness of Paul’s words and the commands of the Old Testament than Jesus’ words. I’m no Christian myself but it’s blatantly clear that Jesus is the most important since the word Christian means Christ like.
The new elders book said that if you suspect your ex mate has had sex then that’s enough. Tell your friend to take it to the CO or the branch etc
So how does this couple rectify things to be reinstated? Surely, they can’t get divorced. Remain celibate as a married couple? There’s no reasonable solution.
It’s considered adultery, which terminates the first marriage, making the current one valid now, lol. So all they have to do is repent, aka grovel at the elder’s feet.
Perfect example of how they take a legalistic,
pharisee-like attitude though.
I would guess the two witness rule was for whatever the reason they got divorced for in the first place...
I know a couple where the woman produced a divorce document. She then got married, they have a kid... Then someone claimed the document was fake... They both got disfellowshiped, were instructed to not live together... It was insanity.
JW remarriage rules are what woke me up. When a religion micromanages a human’s right to marry or remarry then its a controlling cult. Of course just one of many evidences that the JWs are a cult.
If they divorced *without* grounds of infidelity, but then HE remarries, his new-marriage is considered Adulterous. This automatically frees the first wife, but the now-guilty party is still subject to punishment of a JC.
Edit: If the first wife couldn’t prove adultery -or- neither party admitted to it, then the divorce is accepted as legal only; however, they are still viewed as “One Flesh” in Jehovah’s eyes and not permitted to remarry. As the husband chose to remarry, adultery is now established. Guilt must be assigned for anyone to move forward within cult rules.
omg. this is really crazy.
This story confuses me. Did he just assume he could go ahead with the marriage or did he speak to the elders first? A friend of mine was in a similar situation, she was divorced from her first husband who wasn't a JW, met a JW man she wanted to marry, but she had to prove to the elders that her first marriage was on the grounds that he cheated, or she wasn't free to marry. It took some doing, but she finally got 2 Witnesses to prove it. It sounds like this couple might not have followed the proper theocratic procedure (not that I agree with it)
I believe he thought he was good to get married.
My point is where in the Bible does it to be so judgemental
They took Jesus words way to far
Yeah, that's true, but as long as you're in, you have to play by their rules (or else) Let's hope this experience wakes this couple up to the Organisation's oppressive rules.
I don't understand the whole situation Mate.
So this bloke committed adultery while he was married and admitted it? So he must have been disfellowshipped and later reinstated? And now that he is remarried, his ex wife is claiming he needed two witnesses to his sexual intercourse with another woman in order to prove he really did it?
He gets married his ex finds out and tells her elders he isn't free to get married.
She claims she never committed adultery or fornication so he should be disfellowshipped
Elders book says that a spouse could have received a private confession and therefore could make a personal decision to remarry. 2 witnesses not required.
As always- never talk to the police, I mean, elders
Well according to that new feb 2022 article you don’t have all, the facts to second guess that decision. Spiritual food at the proper time eh. Something unjust will always be unjust even if you claim your god is always just.
I want proof this sounds like an urban legend.
Unfortunately, this is not an urban legend. I already know that one day when I remarry I am going to be disfellowshipped if they find out. My divorce was on the grounds of abuse not adultery although I know my ex is out here doing the most he’d never admit it. Whatever, good thing I don’t live my life according to that foolishness anymore!